Download History of Education Sociocultural origins of Turkish educational

This article was downloaded by: [TÜBİTAK EKUAL]
On: 11 November 2009
Access details: Access Details: [subscription number 772815468]
Publisher Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 3741 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
History of Education
Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t713599897
Sociocultural origins of Turkish educational reforms and ideological
origins of late Ottoman intellectuals (1908-1930)
Mustafa Gündüz a
a
Department of Educational Studies, Firat University, Faculty of Education, 23100 Elazig, Turkey
To cite this Article Gündüz, Mustafa'Sociocultural origins of Turkish educational reforms and ideological origins of late
Ottoman intellectuals (1908-1930)', History of Education, 38: 2, 191 — 216
To link to this Article: DOI: 10.1080/00467600701855838
URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00467600701855838
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf
This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or
systematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or
distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.
The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents
will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug doses
should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss,
actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly
or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.
History of Education
Vol. 38, No. 2, March 2009, 191–216
Sociocultural origins of Turkish educational reforms and
ideological origins of late Ottoman intellectuals (1908–1930)
Mustafa Gündüz*
Department of Educational Studies, Firat University, Faculty of Education, 23100 Elazig,
Turkey
Downloaded By: [TÜBTAK EKUAL] At: 22:11 11 November 2009
History
10.1080/00467600701855838
THED_A_285745.sgm
0046-760X
Original
Taylor
02009
00
000002008
and
&
ofArticle
Francis
Education
Francis
(print)/1464-5130
Ltd
(online)
The modern Turkish state and society have been greatly influenced by reforms of
the education system. Second Constitutional Period reforms can be viewed as the
preparatory stage of Republican reforms and a time when many of the later
reforms were planned and given limited application. In this way both periods
contributed to the foundation of modern Turkey. The innovations pioneered by
Late Ottoman intellectuals stemmed from various origins, mostly European
positivists and materialist philosophers. American pragmatism was added as an
ideological source during the foundation of the Republic. It can be observed that
ideological trends took root from Ottoman times according to the degree that
intellectuals were affected by them. In this paper, the ideological origins of
educational reforms during the Second Constitution Period have been studied in
relation to the influence of European philosophers on Ottoman intellectuals of the
time and their ideological environments. Late Ottoman intellectuals were found to
have been largely affected by France’s positivism, German’s materialism and
Comte, Durkheim, Büchner and Spencer. The paper reveals how modern Turkey’s
educational philosophy parameters have been shaped by these intellectuals’ ideas.
Keywords: Turkish Republic educational reforms; educational philosophy;
educational sociology; late Ottoman intellectuals; second constitution period;
positivism; materialism
Introduction
The beginning of the demise of the classical order in Ottoman state and society was
marked by a set of reforms in the late sixteenth and early seventeenth century. There
were many internal and external factors which influenced these changes. Among the
most important measures taken to protect the state were re-establishing land regulations and taxation, controlling migration and the population growth, strengthening the
central administration and reforming military conscription. An indicator of the modern
and pragmatic approach to finding ways of solving state problems was the priority
given to modernisation of the military. The objective of the reforms was to ‘reinforce
the power of central administration, rather than to raise the life standards of the
public’.1 Education was one of the main tools used to materialise this aim. The
modernisation movement within the Ottoman Empire also gained a new philosophical,
*Email: [email protected], [email protected]
1
K. Karpat, Osmanlı Modernle şmesi; Toplum, Kurumsal De ğ i şim ve Nüfus [Ottoman
·
Modernization: Society, Institutional Change and Population] (Ankara: Imge Press, 2002), 81.
[sc]edli
g[bevr]
[sc]edli
[Id]ot
ISSN 0046-760X print/ISSN 1464-5130 online
© 2009 Taylor & Francis
DOI: 10.1080/00467600701855838
http://www.informaworld.com
Downloaded By: [TÜBTAK EKUAL] At: 22:11 11 November 2009
192
M. Gündüz
social and political depth with the introduction of the printing machine and the opening
of new schools.
Until the seventeenth century, education within the empire was limited to classical
primary schools known as sıbyan mektepleri, the madrasah, and the Palace School
known as Enderun mektebi. Although education did not extend throughout society,
receiving an education was still the gateway to a higher social class. These traditional
schools of the Ottoman Empire offered a largely religious education with little emphasis on the development of rational or critical thought. The Palace School and
Madrasah were mainly responsible for raising qualified personnel for government
administration. In the early seventeenth century, Ottomans were no longer able to keep
up with the innovations in Europe and the realisation of this resulted in the establishment of a new educational system. Military schools were the first to open. Following
the French Revolution, new schools gained even more importance so that social order
could be kept and the innovations in Europe could be followed. However, traditional
educational institutions continued to exist and to offer religious education during this
process; they also countered the newly opened schools which were ordering course
books and recruiting teachers from Europe. This conflict persisted within society until
the establishment of the Turkish Republic.
The period of reformation within the Ottoman Empire, Tanzimat,2 began in 1839.
It ignited a set of far-reaching changes in government administration and social life.
It was innovative in terms of the legal code and introduced equality in society. The
field of education also witnessed important changes in this era. The courses taught at
the newly opened military and medical schools in particular brought about gradual,
sustained change in the mindset of the Ottoman elite. This process saw the introduction
of European rational thought, and materialist and positivist philosophy.3 During this
era Ottoman intellectuals became familiar with the ideas of the European Reformation.
Berkes notes that:
Ottoman literati had already come across the works of Montesquieu, Rousseau,
Fe′nelon, Fontenelle and Voltaire by the mid-nineteenth century and ‘became familiar
with the ideas of the European philosophers of the Enlightenment and nineteenth
century materialism, evolutionism and Darwinism by the end of the century. The names
of Schopenhauer, Haeckel, Büchner, Draper, Renan, Taine, Spencer, Gustav Le Bon,
Th. Tibot, Stuart Mill, Flaubert, Balzac and Zola had begun to circulate in Ottoman
intellectual life.4
2The process that started in 1839 with the legal reform in the Ottoman state. Mustafa Re şit
Pasha read an Imperial Order and started a set of legal reforms which marked the beginning of
European-style innovations in law, conscription, industry, education, trade and social life.
3Some see this mental change in high-level Ottomans as the beginning of secularism in the
Ottoman Empire. However Karpat views this as a ‘loss of traditional and cultural identity’;
Karpat, 2002, 81.
4N. Berkes, The Development of Secularism in Turkey (Montreal: McGill University Press,
·
1969), 295; N. Irem, ‘Undercurrents of European Modernity and the Foundations of Modern
Turkish Conservatism: Bergsonism in Retrospect’, Middle Eastern Studies 40, no. 4 (2004):
84–85.
sc[]edli
[Id]ot
History of Education
193
In fact, this process started 100 years earlier than the Tanzimat, during the first diplomatic encounters with the West. Mardin and Beydilli5 describe the early years of
positivist thought in the Ottoman Empire:
… the reports of the envoys had a ‘positivistic’ flavor, which recreated another shared
tacit element, that of the bureaucrats’ discourse. No wonder, then, that the foundation of
the nineteenth-century reform movement known as the Tanzimat was modeled on the
theories of the Austro-German Cameralists, those reformers of state structures whose
view adumbrated the later positivists and Saint-Simonians.
Downloaded By: [TÜBTAK EKUAL] At: 22:11 11 November 2009
The entire reform movement of the Tanzimat was based on the positivistic view of the
social engineer. In the 1790s, a doorway into that worldview had been the similarly
positivistic cast of military education.6
The first encounters of Muslim Ottoman intellectuals with the West were rather
complex and are not yet fully understood. How did rational thought originate in
Ottoman intellectuals who first looked down on and then defended what they had
discovered in the West? What was the role of Islam in the encounter with Western
thought? How did the shift to materialist and positivist thought take place and what
were its reasons? How did late Ottoman thinking give birth to the fathers of the Republic who believed in and materialised rational thought, a secular educational system, and
a positivist government and society? These questions constitute the main aims of this
article. Discovering how it was possible for Mustafa Kemal and his friends to create
a new secular state and society from the Islamic Ottoman state is critical to understanding this process. The present study attempts to understand the ideological roots of the
educational reformers of the Republic through a literature survey. It is hoped that this
will partly explain the intellectual transformation that created modern Turkey.
A key term in the study is ‘Ottoman intellectuals’. ‘The qualities attributed to
people defined as “âlim” (scholar) or “ârif” (wise) in the traditional Ottoman society
do not carry the same emphasis as the Western concepts of “intellect”, “intellectual”,
“le siècle des lumières”’.7 As an equivalent of the Western term ‘an expert working
with ideas’, the term ‘Ottoman intellectual’ was used to refer to people who were
involved in state problems, tried to voice social and political issues and strove to
generate solutions within the Ottoman state. It is assumed here that people have a
culture of ‘critical discourse’8 (the understanding that any social and philosophical
value could be discussed).9 It was with the Tanzimat that Ottoman intellectuals with
a culture of critical discourse started to emerge and the first example was Şinasi. This
process continued during the second Me şrutiyet and peaked with Mustafa Kemal in
the Republic era.
Another important concept in the study is ‘influence and affect’. One of the most
basic difficulties and paradoxes of historical sociological research is the difficulty in
S[]celdi
[sc]edli
5K. Beydilli, Türk Bilim ve Matbaacılık Tarihinde Mühendishâne Matbaası ve Kütüphanesi
(1776– 1826) [Engineering Press and Library in the History of Turkish Science and Printing]
·
( Istanbul: Eren Press, 1995).
6Ş. Mardin, ‘Turkish Islamic Exceptionalism Yesterday and Today: Continuity, Rupture and
Reconstruction in Operational Codes’, Turkish Studies 6, no. 2 (2005): 150.
7Ş. Mardin, Türkiye’de Din ve Siyaset, Makaleler 3 [Religion and Politics in Turkey, Articles
·
3] (Istanbul: Iletişim Press, 2000), 266.
8See, for ‘Critics expression culture’: A.W. Gouldner, The Future of the Intellectuals and the
Rise of the New Class (London: Macmillan, 1979).
9Mardin, 2000, 268.
[Id]ot
S[]celdi
S[]celdi
[Id]ot
sc[]edli
194
M. Gündüz
explaining the ‘influence and affect’ that a contemporary or a predecessor has on a
writer. Many historians and sociologists may err when considering this because the
‘influence and affect’ seen on the most recent writer can go back a long way, making
it impossible to understand who was influenced by whom, to what extent and in what
way. This study has made use of Skinner’s ideas to explain the concept of ‘influence
and affect’:
Downloaded By: [TÜBTAK EKUAL] At: 22:11 11 November 2009
There is no doubt that the concept of ‘influence’, while extremely elusive (if it is to be
distinguished from a cause) is far from being empty of explanatory force…. Most explanations are purely mythological, as can be readily be demonstrated simply by considering what the necessary conditions would have to be for helping to explain the appearance
in any given writer B of any given doctrine, by invoking the ‘influence’ of some earlier
given writer A. Such a set of conditions would at least have to include (a) that there
should be a genuine similarity between the doctrines of A and B; (b) that B could not
have found the relevant doctrine in any writer other A; (c) that the probability of the
similarity being random should be very low.10
The ‘influence and affect’ of intellectuals means the following: If Ottoman intellectuals
have agreed with their contemporaries or predecessors (whether these be Westerners
or locals, modern or historical figures), if they have referred to them in their own works
and promoted them in their books, articles or ideas, or if they have tried to materialise
their ideas in their own contexts, then a positive interaction can be said to exist between
the parties. Naturally, this is a conscious or unconscious process of transmission from
Western intellectuals by their Ottoman counterparts. For people in whom the process
of transmission cannot be tangibly identified, the issue of ‘influence and affect’ is
therefore regarded as irrelevant.
Educational reforms and their origins: the importance of education in the
new Republic
In the new Republic many new reforms were made in social, cultural, economic, political and legal areas. The Republican regime and parliamentary system operated under
secular and democratic rules. A mixed economic programme, new commercial treaties,
acceptance of European-style clothing and measurement, and new arrangements for
the provision of social and cultural activities were some of the important reforms in
economic and sociocultural fields. In addition to these, important reforms were made
in the area of education. On every possible occasion, political and intellectual leaders
emphasised the importance of education for the new state and society. ‘The new
Republic era and its leadership saw education “as the most important foundation of
transformation”. In order to create a modern state, it was necessary to forge new values,
new ideologies and new ways of looking at things’.11 These educational reforms were
the ones that affected and shaped the newly founded Republic and social life.
The Turkish Republic constituted its own laws which protected and supported
new reforms. ‘Republicanism’, ‘nationalism’, ‘secularism’, ‘populism’ and ‘étatism’
10J. Tully, Meaning and Context, Quentin Skinner and His Critics (Princeton, NJ: Princeton
University Press, 1988), 45, 46.
11A.M. Kazamias, Education and Quest for Modernity in Turkey (Chicago, IL: University of
Chicago Press, 1966); S. Turan, ‘John Dewey’s Report of 1924 and his Recommendations on
the Turkish Educational System Revisited’, History of Education, Journal of the History of
the Education Society 29, no. 6 (2000): 546–547.
Downloaded By: [TÜBTAK EKUAL] At: 22:11 11 November 2009
History of Education
195
(statism) were the fundamental principals of the state. Education became an important tool for both the protection and the continuation of the Republic. Even before the
foundation of the new Republic, educational meetings and conferences were
arranged12 and education continued regardless of difficulties in political, military and
economic areas. For these reasons, the founder of the Republic, Mustafa Kemal
(1881–1938), emphasised the importance of education in social development and
stated that ‘regardless of what we have to do to succeed in education, this is the only
way to advance’.13 By also stating that ‘education either enables a nation to be free,
glorious and advanced or causes captivity, corruption and misery’14 he emphasised
the importance of education for the Republic. In this new era, the importance of
education and science was to be continually emphasised.
To be able to learn about the areas that affect educational ideas and their origins,
we have to examine the expectations from education, published articles and the school
curriculum of this era. The main goal of the Republic’s reforms was to establish a
national, modern and secular society. All these aims could be achieved via a national
education system. In one of his speeches, Mustafa Kemal declared his expectations of
education as follows: ‘to be able to use knowledge in daily life, education has to be
used as a practical and useful tool’.15 He also argued that ‘a non-national education
system was the reason behind the failure of the previous education system’16 and
success could only be accomplished with a new national system. For this reason, the
second minister of education stated that ‘the spirit of our education is patriotism, its
direction is western, and its goal is nation-building’.17 According to Mustafa Kemal,
the main goal of education was to protect a nation’s existence and future. In order to
maintain the independence of Turkey, originality and Turkish customs needed to be
taught to new generations. In his mind, ‘the first duty of education is to raise individuals to function well in the society, educate them and furnish them with culture’.18 He
also thought that a powerful and healthy society could only be established with
healthy individuals.
Following the foundation of the Republic many changes were enacted which
impacted variously on the modernisation of education in Turkey. They include the
Law of Unification of Instruction (Tevhid-i Tedrisat), the Alphabet Reforms, the foundation of Public Schools, the founding of the Turkish Historical Society and Turkish
Language Society and the reformation of universities. However, it is widely held that
12‘Maarif Kongresi’, Hâkimiyet-i Milliye [‘Congress of Education’, National Sovereignty] (17
July 1921); Y. Akyüz, ‘Atatürk ve 1921 Eğitim Kongresi’, Cumhuriyet Döneminde E ğ itim
[Education in the Republic Period] (Ankara: A.Ü. Press, 1983), 89–103.
13Atatürk’ün Söylev ve Demeçleri II [Atatürk’s Speeches and Declarations] (Ankara: TTK
Press, 1945), 196.
14V. Bingöl, Atatürk’ün Mili E ğ itimizle I· lgili Dü şünce ve Buyrukları [Atatürk’s Ideas and
Orders Dealing with National Education] (Ankara: TDK Press, 1970), 36.
15E. Arslan, Atatürkçü Dü şünce Siteminde Türk E ğ itimi [Turkish Education in Atatürk’s Idea
System] (Diyarbakır: Dicle Üniversity Press, 1989), 38.
16Bingöl, 1970, 37.
17‘Maarifimize Umûmi I·stikamet, Hamdullah Suphi Beyefendi Ne Diyorlar?’, Hâkimiyet–i
Milliye [‘General Direction For Education, What does Hamdullah Suphi Say?’, National
Sovereignty] (27 October 1922). For Mustafa Kemal’s ideas about education see: Mustafa
Ergün, Atatürk Devri Türk E ğ itimi [Turkish Education In Atatürk’s Period] (Ankara: Ocak
Press, 1997), 17.
18Atatürk’ün Maarife Ait Direktifleri [Atatürk’s Directives on Education] (I·stanbul: Maarif
Vekâleti Press, 1939), 11.
geb[vre]
g[bevr]
[sc]edli
g[bevr]
][dIot
[sc]edli
g[bevr]
[Id]ot
g[bevr]
[Id]ot
196
M. Gündüz
Figure 1. Most of the late Ottoman intellectuals graduated from the Royal Medical Academy
(Mekteb-i Tıbbıye-i Şahane). New social and philosophical ideas that were developing in Europe were first taught and adopted here.
Downloaded By: [TÜBTAK EKUAL] At: 22:11 11 November 2009
S[]celdi
·
the modernisation of education in Turkey started with Ibrahim Müterrefika’s19 introduction of the printing machine to the Ottoman Empire. Indeed, the formation of military schools during Sultan Selim III (1789–1807) sowed the seeds of modern
education.20 Especially during Tanzimat (1839–1876), modern public and military
schools (Tıbbiye, Royal Medical Academy; Harbiye, Royal Military Academy; and
Mülkiye, Royal School of Administration) became more widespread. Following Selim
III, the reformation of education gained momentum during the reign of Mahmud II.
Turkish people’s efforts to look like European people started with Mahmud II (1820–
1839) and were completed during Mustafa Kemal’s period (1923–1938).21 After the
Tanzimat, the quality and quantity of education improved during Abdülhamid II
(1876–1908) and the Second Constitutional Period (1908–1923). The best-known
·
members of the Committee of Union and Progress (CUP) ( I ttihat ve Terakki Cemiyeti)
and the founders of the Republic all graduated from the schools which were opened
during the reign of Abdülhamid II.22 As can be seen, the new Republic inherited an
education system that was open to modernisation. The intellectual basis for modern
education and science was already structured before the foundation of the Republic.
Hence, all these developments in education laid the basis for the educational reforms
post-1923.
dI[]ot
[dI]ot
Figure 1. Most of the late Ottoman intellectuals graduated from the Royal Medical Academy (Mekteb-i Tıbbıye-i S[a]celdihane). New social and philosophical ideas that were developing in Europe were first taught and adopted here.
19I·brahim Müteferrika (1670?–1747), born in Erdel (Erdély), was an eighteenth-century
Ottoman statesman and intellectual. He was the founder of the first Ottoman printing house.
20F.R. Unat, Türkiye E ğ itim Sisteminin Geli şmesine Tarihi Bir Bakı ş [A Historical Observation
on the Development of the Turkish Educational System] (Ankara: MEB Press, 1964), 1–89. E.Z.
Karal, Osmanlı Tarihi, V.5, Nizâm-ı Cedid ve Tanzimat Devirleri (1789–1856) [Ottoman
History] (Ankara: TTK Press, 1999).
21N. Berkes, Türkiye’de Ça ğ da şla şma [The Development of Secularism in Turkey] ( I·stanbul:
YKY, 2002), 195.
22B.C. Fortna, Mekteb-i Hümayun, Osmanlı I· mparatorlu ğ unun Son Döneminde I· slâm,
Devlet ve E ğ itim [Imperial Classroom: Islam, the State and Education in the Late Ottoman
·
Empire] (I·stanbul: Iletişim Press 2005), 295; the role played by CUP members in Turkish
political life are well examined in E.J. Zürcher, The Role of the Committee of Union Progress
and in the Turkish Nationalist Movement (1905–1926) (Leiden, 1984). Again see: M.Ş.
Hanioğlu, The Young Turks in Opposition (New York: Oxford University Press, 1995), 3.
][Idot
g[bevr]
[sc]edli
g[bevr]
[sc]edli
[sc]edli
[sc]edli
[Id]ot
][dIot
g[bevr]
][dIot
g[bevr]
[Id]ot
[Id]ot
sc[]edli
S[]celdi
geb[vre]
Downloaded By: [TÜBTAK EKUAL] At: 22:11 11 November 2009
History of Education
197
Prior to the Turkish Republic, many artists, scientists, engineers and politicians
had already adopted European styles of science, art and philosophy. By the late 1860s
the education of women and their participation in public life was under way and the
importance of child education was widely recognised. In another example, the
‘banning of violence and punishment in schools had started during Tanzimat’.23
During this period, science and engineering had been added to the curriculum in some
schools. The precursors of the Republican-era Village Institutes were also established
during the Tanzimat period. By the early 1900s, the ideas of Russian literati about
public education were discussed in Turkey. For this reason it can be argued that the
origins of the Republic’s reforms lie in the intellectual movements of the Second
Constitutional Period.
The Republic ‘gave extra importance to education and used it to spread its ideology
and reforms to the public’.24 However, it is also thought that its excessive emphasis
on ideology and utilisation of education to instil ideology ‘weakened and atrophied
Turkish intellectual life’.25
The Law of Unification of Instruction adopted in March 1924 combined all educational institutions under the control of the Ministry of Education.26 Shortly before this
in 1923 Mustafa Kemal stated in Izmir that ‘our nation’s educational institutions must
be similar. All Turkish citizens, women and men, must graduate from these’.27 This
statement highlighted the importance of educational unity to the founders of the
Republic and has been used as evidence that the objective of the law was to forge an
education system with a secular ideology.28 ‘The Law of Unification of Instruction
was concerned with the implementation of the policies of secularism’.29 Indeed, this
secularist ideology in education also had its roots in the Tanzimat. It has also been
argued that secularist thought had much earlier origins among Ottoman intellectuals
and governors.30
When the first modern schools were established, all schools except the Royal
Medical and Military Academies and the Royal School of Administration were affiliated to the Ministry of Public Education (Maarif-i Umûmiye Nezâreti). The unity of
education was first stipulated in the Regulation for Public Education (Maarrif-i
Umumiye Nizannâmesi) in 1869. During the Second Constitutional Period, an earlier
Law of Unification of Instruction was introduced. Many intellectuals regarded unity
of education as the only way to succeed in the areas of education, military, science and
23Münif (Paşa). ‘Ehemmiyet-i Terbiye-i Sıbyan’, Mecmua-yı Fünûn [‘Importance of Child
Education’, The Journal of Sciences] (Cemaziyelevvel 1279/1866), no. 5: 176–185.
24O. Kafadar, ‘Cumhuriyet Dönemi Eğitim Tartışmaları’, Modern Türkiye’de Siyasî Dü şünce,
Modernle şme ve Batıcılık [‘Education Discussions in Republic Period’, Political Thought In
·
·
Modern Turkey, Modernization and Westernization] (Istanbul: Iletişim Press, 2003), Vol. 3,
378.
25Y. Aktay, ‘Türkiye Siyasî Düşüncesinde Kayıp Halka’ [Lost Ring in Turkey’s Political
·
Thought], Dîvân, Istanbul (2005), Vol. 19, 39–40.
26G.N. Saqıb, Modernization of Muslim Education in Egypt, Pakistan and Turkey: A
Comparative Study (Lahore, Pakistan: Islamic Book Service, 1983).
27Atatürk’s Directives on Education, 15.
28I·. Sungu, ‘Tevhidi Tedrisat’ [Law of Unification of Instruction], Belleten, Ankara (1938),
II. Vol. 7, 8, 397–431.
29From S. Turan, 2000, 550.
30‘The reports of the envoys had a “positivistic” flavor, which recreated another shared tacit
element, that of the bureaucrats’ discourse…. The entire reform movement of the Tanzimat
was based on the positivistic view of the social engineer.’ Mardin, 2005, 150.
sc[]edli
geb[vre]
sc[]edli
[sc]edli
[sc]edli
[Id]ot
sc[]edli
[Id]ot
[Id]ot
[Id]ot
sc[]edli
Downloaded By: [TÜBTAK EKUAL] At: 22:11 11 November 2009
198
M. Gündüz
social life because the education system in the Ottoman Empire was much more
diverse than that in other developed countries. Primary schools (Sıbyan-Mahalle
mektebleri), madrasah, religious schools, military schools and foreign schools were
just some of the many different institutions, all separately administered from different
ministries. For this reason, Abdullah Cevdet stated that: ‘We want unity, which can be
achieved by having a common interest, sentiments, faith and educational unity. I
would like to especially emphasise educational unity because there is no other country
in the world which has a more diverse education system than Turkey’.31
Abdullah Cevdet stressed the significance of educational unity and made an
appeal for all schools to be gathered under one umbrella. He was one of the first
promoters of the Law of Unification of Instruction before the foundation of the
Republic. To defend his ideas, he used examples from European and American
educational systems.32 In addition, in an educational commission in 1914, he used the
terms ‘unity in education (vahdet-i terbiye) and the Law of Unification of Instruction’.33 Until that time, the education system had a religious context. Reformers saw
this as the principal reason why new laws were necessary. Late Ottoman intellectuals,
who imported Positivist and Materialist philosophies to the society after Tanzimat,
also emphasised the importance of non-religious education for bringing about social
change.
Another of the key principles of the new Republic was laicism34 which continues
to be discussed within Turkish society. Defined as separating the affairs of state and
religious matters from each other,35 its essence is that the state must keep the same
distance from all religious belief systems. This principle had its origins in the late
fifteenth century, when efforts were made to limit the influence of the clergy on
government, and assumed its modern meaning after the establishment of the Republic.36 The modern meaning of laicism had been discussed earlier by the intellectuals
of the Second Constitutional Period. For example, Ahmed Rıza (1858–1930) who
had been influenced by the French positivist sociologist August Comte, contended
that the nature of education should be a ‘secular ethical education’.37 Another intellectual of the era, Abdullah Cevdet, also advocated a secular education system,
·
·
Cevdet, ‘Kıvâm-ı Akvam,’ I ştihâd, Istanbul (5 February 1914), no. 90–1, 2016;
·
Again see: M. Gündüz, II. Me şrutiyet’in Klasik Paradigmaları, I çtihad, Sebilü’r-Re şad ve
Türk Yurdu’nda Toplumsal Tezler [Classical Paradigms of the Second Constitution, Social
·
Thesis in I ctihat, Sebilü’r-Re şad and Türk Yurdu Journals] (Ankara: 1997, Lotus Press).
32Abdullah Cevdet published extensively on American and European schools. For the best
known, see: O. Buyse, Methodes Americaines d’Education Generale et Technique (Umûmî ve
·
Âli Amerika Terbiye Usûlleri), trans. Abdullah Cevdet (Istanbul: Matbaa-i Âmire, 1925,
1926).
33Y. Akyüz, ‘Türk Eğitim Tarihi Açısından Öğretim Birliği ve Tevhid-i Tedrisat’ın Önemi
(The Importance of the Law of Unification of Instruction for Turkish Education History)
(Ankara: A.Ü. Press, 2002), 39.
34In Turkish Lâiklik, laicism is one of the basic principles underlying the political ideology of
the Republican People’s Party (1931) (Cumhuriyet Halk Partisi CHP) and later incorporated
into the Constitution of 1937. It signifies the ideology of ‘secularism’ and the secularisation
policies of the Republican period.
35Berkes, 1969, 18; B. Lewis, The Emergency of Modern Turkey (London: Royal Institute of
International Affairs, Oxford University Press, 1961), 397.
36Lewis, 1961, 396.
37Ahmed Rıza. Maarif-i Umûmiyenin Islahına Dair Sultan Abdülhamid Han-ı Sani
Hazretlerine Takdim Kılınan Altı Layihadan Birincisi [The First of the Six Reports that were
Presented to Abdülhamid II for General Educational Reform] (London: 1312/1886), 5.
31Abdullah
][dIot
[sc]edli
[Id]ot
[sc]edli
[d]Iot
][dIot
[sc]edli
][Idot
geb[vre]
geb[vre]
geb[vre]
[sc]edli
History of Education
199
famously stating that receiving no education is better than receiving an education that
has been affected by religion.38 Many other intellectuals also advocated the same
type of secular education. For instance, Kılıçzâde Hakkı (1872–1959), Mizancı
Murad (1854–1917) and Prince Sebahattin (1877–1948) also expressed similar
secular ideas, mostly the imitation of Comte and Durkheim’s positivism. Durkheim
defined secular education as follows: ‘in our schools we decided to give secular
ethics education to our children. This means not to take anything from celestial
religion and to abide by feelings, ideas, applications which can be judged by wisdom,
simply this is secular (laicist) education’.39 It is therefore evident that the ideas of the
late Ottoman Empire’s intellectuals concerning secular education were affected by
the French Positivism movement.
Apart from education, the fields of sociology, philosophy, social life, literature
and culture were also influenced by French positivism and materialism. For instance,
even though they had different sociological ideas, most Ottoman sociologists,
namely Ali Suavi, Beşir Fuad, Ahmet Suayb, Prens Sabahattin, Ziya Gökalp,
·
·
Mehmet Izzet and Ismayıl Hakkı Baltacıoğlu, adopted French positivist philosophy.
As in French positivist sociology, they mostly attributed the mission of arrangement
and integration to sociology. ‘They accepted sociology like positivist science such as
physics and chemistry as their French colleagues did’40 and ‘accepted science as a
positivist philosophy’.41 They tried to solve social problems by using remedies from
positivist sociologists such as the social theories of Comte, Spencer and Durkheim.
With the influence of this movement, Baltacıoğlu argued that ‘sociology must
arrange social life’.42 For this reason, during the Second Constitution and Republic
periods, great importance was given to sociology and it was even added to the high
school curriculum.
Downloaded By: [TÜBTAK EKUAL] At: 22:11 11 November 2009
sc[e]dli
dI[]ot
dI[]ot
geb[vre]
geb[vre]
Relationship between nation-building, citizenship and education
Various previous studies have shown that ‘state formation is a complicated project
containing conflicting tasks. It reminds us that state hegemonic strategies always
bring about contradictory results, and the connection between education and state
formation is always dialectical’.43 This close relationship between education and the
state started after the Industrial Revolution. The use of education in building a nation,
spreading nationalism and modernisation was seen openly in the nineteenth century
38M.Ş. Hanioğlu, Bir Siyasal Dü şünür Olarak Abdullah Cevdet ve Dönemi [Abdullah Cevdet
·
as a Political Thinker and His Times] ( Istanbul: Üçdal Neşriyat, 1981), 370; Cevdet said that
·
his ideas had occurred during Republic, see: Abdullah Cevdet, ‘Mustafa Kemal Pa şa ve Ilgâ·
·
yı Esâret’, I çtihad, Istanbul (1 September 1925), no. 188, 3706.
39Emile Durkheim, L’Education Morale (Paris: Librairie Felix Alcan, 1925), 3: Reported by
·
M. Korlaelçi, Pozitivizmin Türkiye’ye Giri şi ve I lk Etkileri [The Introduction of Positivism in
Turkey and Its First Impacts] (Ankara: Hece Press, 2002), 40.
40E. Yıldırım, ‘Türk Sosyolojisinde Pozitivizm: Bilginin Sosyolojik Tasarımı (1908–1945)’,
Sosyoloji Ara ştırmaları Dergisi [‘Positivism in Turkish Sociology, Sociological Design of
Knowledge, 1908–1945’, Journal of Sociological Research], Ankara (2004/1), 117.
41Yıldırım, 2004, 113.
42 I·. H. Baltacıoğlu, Batıya Do ğ ru [West Wards] ( I·stanbul: MEB Press, 1945), 90.
43T.-H. Wong, ‘Education and State Formation Reconsidered: Chinese School Identity in
Postwar Singapore’, Journal of Historical Sociology 16, no. 2 (2003): 237–265.
S[]celdi
geb[vre]
[sc]edli
[Id]ot
sc[]edli
sc[e]dli
[d]Iot
[Id]ot
[sc]edli
[]dIot
[sc]edli
[Id]ot
geb[vre]
g[bevr]
[Id]ot
[Id]ot
Downloaded By: [TÜBTAK EKUAL] At: 22:11 11 November 2009
200
M. Gündüz
in ‘the US, UK, France’,44 ‘Germany, Austria’,45 the Ottoman Empire46 and Far
Eastern47 states.
Following the French Revolution, nation-states started to be formed throughout
the world. The Industrial Revolution which preceded the French Revolution encouraged the capitalist economic system in Europe and, parallel to this, the formation of
nation-states as well. The two systems remained interdependent and developed. The
survival of the capitalist economic system and the industrial society depended on qualified manpower, which could be achieved through education. Education was looked
to for raising the human profile required by the Industrial Revolution and for creating
the ‘citizen’ necessary for the nation-state. The responsibilities of education in this era
were, as such: ‘the task was to help people gain the skills and knowledge with which
to live more productive, sufficient and healthy lives and ultimately become citizens of
a modern, “progressive and democratic” state’.48 Following the Reformation in
Europe, innovations in education gained critical importance.49 This importance was
also reflected in the growing education budgets of these countries. The spread of
schools and the shift to compulsory education for all started more or less at similar
times in Europe and Ottoman Turkey.50 The need for these developments emerged
from the decline that the Ottoman Empire was experiencing at the time. In the 1880s
the education policy of France was largely based on raising patriotic citizens. This
educational policy started to be used in the Ottoman Empire to spread Ottomanism.
For instance, the educational policy during the reign of Abdülhamid II was based on
strengthening and conserving the central power, to give life to pan-Islamist politics
and to raise Ottoman citizens.51
The policy of shaping citizens through education was adopted by the Turkish
Republic approximately 40 years later. France was taken as a model in this process.
Therefore, the French language was promoted in the Turkish high school curriculum
so that the French citizenship system could be better taught.52 The content of the
courses entitled ‘Turkish History’, ‘Turkish Geography’ and ‘National Studies’ were
also rearranged in order to raise better citizens. The main aim of these changes was to
ensure social unity. Education was given the functions of social unification and talent
development. This new role of education was inspired by Emile Durkheim, according
to whom education had two aims: ‘The first was to develop the talent needed for the
industrial economy, and the second one was to achieve social unification by cultural
44Andrew Green, Education and State Formation, the Rise of Education System in England,
France and the USA (London: Macmillan, 1990).
45M. Lamberti, State, Society and the Elementary School in Imperial Germany (New York:
Oxford University Press, 1981).
46S.A. Somel, The Modernization of Public Education in the Ottoman Empire, 1839–1908:
Islamization, Autocracy and Discipline (Leiden: Brill Academic Publishers, 2001).
47Wong, 2003, 237–265.
48D. M. Ment,. ‘Education, Nation-Building and Modernization After World War I: American
Ideas for the Peace Conference’, Paedagogica Historica 41, nos 1&2 (2005): 170.
49Green, 1990, 1.
50Green, 1990, 15–20; ‘In the 17th century, the Ottoman state and social structure had as
much potential as other countries for the industrial revolution and the capitalist order.
However, the transition to capitalism did not happen as factors such as migration and the
increasing population could not be matched to the new economic developments and the
capital order could not be matched to the society.’ Karpat, 2002, 38.
51Fortna, 2005.
52A.S. Barak, ‘Turkish Education and Democracy, 1923–50’, Middle Eastern Studies, USA
40, no. 2 (2004): 85.
History of Education
201
Downloaded By: [TÜBTAK EKUAL] At: 22:11 11 November 2009
communication’.53 In addition, during the second Constitution, the CUP’s policy of
Turkification was ‘a project of nation-building, transforming the whole empire into a
nation-state and aiming to keep the unity of the empire under the domination of a
Turkish national core’.54 Education was used by the CUP at that time not only for
nation-building but for the centralisation of the administration, with one of the first
reforms being the centralisation of education itself. ‘Turkish pedagogues conveyed a
blueprint for the new society they felt empowered to create. At the same time, they
cultivated relationships among the basic conceptual referents of Kemalism. These
included nationalism, freedom, duty, equality, society-orientedness, rationality and
laicism’.55 In order to achieve these aims, Turkish educators attached a magical power
to education, as they had done earlier in the Abdülhamid period, and believed that they
would only be able to materialise their aims through education.
The origins of Kemalist thought
Only the education system could construct the ideal individual types for the newly
founded state’s society. This determination can be inferred from its leaders’ expectations of education. Among those who determined educational policy in the new
Turkish state were Ziya Gökalp, Yusuf Akçura, Rıza Nur, Ahmed Agayef, Hamdullah
Suphi, Mustafa Necati, Avni Basman, Mehmed Emin Erişirgil, Hilmi Ziya Ülken,
·
Mustafa Şekip Tunç, I. Hakkı Baltacıoğlu and Rahman Öymen. These educators were
rooted in the intellectual legacy of the Second Constitutional Period and influenced the
ideas of the leader of the republic, Mustafa Kemal. In order to understand him, his ideas
regarding the military, educational and political society system need to be examined.56
‘Ottomanism’, ‘Turkism’, ‘Islamism’ and ‘Westernism’ were the dominant political and ideological movements during the early twentieth century. Mustafa Kemal
was influenced by all these movements. For that reason ‘the ideology of Kemalist
reforms is based on the ideological movements of the Second Constitutional
Period’.57 According to the well-known modern Turkish historian Zürcher, the
modernisation of Turkey started during the Tanzimat.58 While he was studying
Kemalist thought, Zürcher first looked at the ideologies of the leaders of the Young
·
Turks: Ahmed Rıza, Ziya Gökalp, Yusuf Akçura, Ahmed Ağaoğlu, Ismail Gaspıralı
and Abdullah Cevdet. With the exception of Abdullah Cevdet and Ahmed Rıza, these
intellectuals advocated Turkism and each had a different effect on Kemalist thought.
Ahmed Rıza (1858–1930) was one of the most effective positivists and laicists
among Young Turks. He was effective in the adaptation of the positivist philosophy
in the state. He had a keen interest in education and advocated modern and secular
educational policies. His ideas were largely shaped by French positivist intellectuals.
sc[e]dli
S[]celdi
dI[]ot
geb[vre]
Figure 2. Yusuf Akçura, who graduated from the Ecole des Sciences Politiques, was affected by Emile Boumty and other French positivist nationalists. He was the premier theorist of Turkish nationalism.
geb[vre]
53Green, 1990, 36.
54E. Ülker, ‘Contextualising
geb[vre]
dI[]ot
‘Turkification’: Nation-building in the Late Ottoman Empire
1908–18’, Nations and Nationalism, UK 11, no. 4 (2005): 632.
55Salmoni, 2004, 83.
56There are some studies into the origins of Kemalist thought. Andrew Mango and Erik-Jan
Zurcher’s studies are well known among these: A. Mango, Atatürk, The Biography of the
Founder of Modern Turkey (New York: Press Overlook by Press Overlook, 2002); E.-J.
Zurcher, Turkey, A Modern History (London & New York: I. B. Tauris, 1993); Lewis, 1961.
57Kafadar, 2003, 352.
58E.-J. Zürcher, ‘Ottoman Sources of Kemalist Thought’, in Late Ottoman Society, The
Intellectual Legacy, ed. E. Özdalga (London and New York: RoutledgeCurzon, 2005), 16.
Downloaded By: [TÜBTAK EKUAL] At: 22:11 11 November 2009
202
M. Gündüz
Figure 2. Yusuf Akçura, who graduated from the Ecole des Sciences Politiques, was affected
by Emile Boumty and other French positivist nationalists. He was the premier theorist of Turkish
nationalism.
Abdullah Cevdet also had radical and secular views. He was one of the proponents of
the Law of Unification of Instruction, the Latin alphabet and women’s rights and liberation. Mustafa Kemal was affected by his innovative ideas for modernisation, which
had European sources. Another intellectual who influenced Kemalism was Ziya
Gökalp.59 His books entitled The Principles of Turkism (Türkçülü ğ ün Esasları) and
·
Turkifying, Islamising and Westernising (Türkleşmek, I slamlaşmak ve Muasırlaşmak)
had an effect on Mustafa Kemal, albeit not as strong as some have claimed. Mustafa
Kemal differed from Gökalp concerning the concepts of ‘nation, nationality,
language, culture and coeducation’.60 Ideologically, Gökalp was a Turkist while also
an activist of secular thought. He was a solidarist61 intellectual and expressed his
thought as solidarism, ideas similar to the principles of Republic Populism as first
g[bevr]
[sc]edli
[dI]ot
[sc]edli
[sc]edli
59U. Heyd, Foundations of Turkish Nationalism; the Life and Teachings of Ziya Gokalp
(London: Luzac & Co. and the Harvill Press, 1950), 140–155; Zürcher, ‘Ottoman Sources of
Kemalist Thought’, 17.
60F. Georgeon, Osmanlı Türk Modernle şmesi (1900–1930) [The Modernization of Ottoman
·
Turkish], trans. Ali Berktay ( Istanbul: YKY, 2006), 95.
61A system of labour arrangements in which labour unions and capitalists jointly set wages
below market clearing levels. This arrangement is traditionally enforced through employer
organisations.
[sc]edli
[Id]ot
History of Education
introduced in the CUP’s 1913 programmes, inspired by French and Russian62 influence and the Usul-i Cedid63 movement.
Hüseyinzâde Ali Bey (Turan)64 was one of Ziya Gökalp’s ideological sources.65
His thoughts can be discerned in Hüsyinzâde Ali Bey’s articles published in the ‘Hayat
and Füyûzat’66 journals. For this reason, Ali Bey became an important intellectual
source of Kemalist ideology. Alongside Ziya Gökalp, Ahmed Ağaoğlu (1869–1939)67
was also an important proponent of secular thought and an opponent of religion.
Mustafa Kemal’s religious ideas were similar to those of Ağaoğlu, who had been
educated in Russia and France. His views on religion were influenced by Russian intellectuals, the Usul-i Cedid movement and French sociologist thought. Another leader
of the Young Turks, Yusuf Akçura, had more influence on Mustafa Kemal’s Turkist
ideology than Ziya Gökalp or Ağaoğlu. Akçura’s Turkism had deep effects on the
ideology of the Republic. ‘Kemalist nationalism68 is different from Ziya Gökalp’s
cultural and Akçura’s ethnic nationality definitions’.69
Ağaoğlu, Akçura and Ali Bey’s ideas had been shaped in Russia. However, they
also adopted Western education and thought. These Russian-origin intellectuals
received both Western and Eastern education and combined them to form their ideas.
For that reason, the effects of these intellectuals on Mustafa Kemal were different
from intellectuals of Ottoman origin such as Abdullah Cevdet, Ahmed Rıza or
Kılıçzâde Hakkı. All these influences show that Kemalist thought was a continuation
of the Young Turks’ ideology.
Filibeli Ahmed Hilmi’s70 works entitled ‘History of Islâm’ and ‘Is it possible to
disclaim God?’ were also read by Mustafa Kemal who is known to have made several
comments on them.71 Mustafa Kemal was also influenced by many other intellectuals,
poets and artists such as Namık Kemal, Tevfik Fikret and Mehmed Emin Yurdakul.
geb[vre]
geb[vre]
geb[vre]
geb[vre]
Downloaded By: [TÜBTAK EKUAL] At: 22:11 11 November 2009
203
geb[vre]
geb[vre]
geb[vre]
geb[vre]
·
Toprak, ‘Halkçılık Ideolojisinin Oluşumu’, Atatürk Döneminin Ekonomik ve Toplumsal
·
·
Tarihiyle I lgili Sorunlar Sempozyumu (Istanbul: 1977), 13–31; Ö. Gökmen, ‘Tek Parti
Dönemi Cumhuriyet Halk Partisinde Muhafazakâr Yönelimler’, Modern Türkiye’de Siyasi
·
·
Dü şünce [Political Thought in Modern Turkey] ( Istanbul: Iletişim Press, 2003), Vol. 5, 147.
63The Tatar modernization movement in Kazan, Turkistan, Samarkand and Middle Asia
during the late nineteenth century.
64Ali Bey was born in Baku in 1864. He came to Istanbul and taught in the Military Medical
School, where he disseminated his ideas among the students who were the founders of the
Young Turks movement. He wrote many poems and books. Later, he returned to Baku and
published newspapers and magazines. He worked for the union of Turks and for the survival
of the Ottoman State. He died in Istanbul in 1940.
65Abdullah Cevdet, ‘ I·hya-yı La Yemût’, I· çtihad, Cairo no. 5 (February 1908): 294–295.
66Heyd, 1950, 149.
67For Ağaoğlu’s affect on the new Turkey and his life, works; see: H. Shissler, Between Two
Empires, Ahmet Agaoglu and the New Turkey (London and New York: I.B. Tauris, 2003); F.
Sakal, A ğ ao ğ lu Ahmed Bey (Ankara: TTK Press, 1999).
68Kemalism: Mustafa Kemal’s and the new Republic of Turkey’s official ideology. There are
six fundamentals of the ideology; republicanism, populism, nationalism, statism,
revolutionalism and secularism.
69Georgeon, 1996, 95; Zürcher, 2005, 21.
70Ahmet Hilmi, was born in Filibe in 1865 and died in Istanbul in 1914. He was a late Ottoman
·
·
Islamist intellectual. He had written the long and widely disproved ‘History of Islâm’ ( I slâm
Tarihi) for famous orientalist Reinhart Pieter Anne Dozy’s book ‘Essai Sur l’histoire de l’
·
·
Islamisme’ (Tarih-i I slâmiyet). He defended spiritualism as opposed to materialism.
71Atatürk’ün Hatıra Defteri [The Diary of Atatürk], prepared by Ş. Tezer (Ankara: TTK
Press, 1999), 83; D. Kushner, The Rise of Turkish Nationalism 1876–1908 (London: Frank
Cass, 1977).
62Z.
[Id]ot
sc[]edli
][dIot
][Idot
[sc]edli
[Id]ot
[Id]ot
geb[vre]
g[bevr]
[Id]ot
sc[]edli
[d]Iot
geb[vre]
g[bevr]
[Id]ot
[]dIot
[Idot
]
[d]Iot
S[]celdi
204
M. Gündüz
Poetry for example had an important influence on Mustafa Kemal’s language simplification reforms. Gara de Waux, Leon Cahun, Hilarie de Barentona and Vianian
Hermann F. Kvergic influenced the Sun Language Theory (Güneş Dil Teorisi).72
Abdullah Cevdet, Mehmet Âkif, Rıza Tevfik and Kılıçzade Hakkı influenced social
change, the modern educational system, language, civilisation and improvement.73
Mustafa Kemal’s expectations of education were parallel to the ideas which were
developed during European Educational History and ‘equivalent to international
norms’.74 Jean Jacques Rousseau was one of the basic sources of Mustafa Kemal’s
views on civilisation, culture, freedom, Republic and race. For instance, Mustafa
Kemal’s view of freedom was affected by John Locke and Rousseau’s ‘nature
rights’.75 His definition of a nation was similar to that of Ernest Renan.76 In the area
of education, Mustafa Kemal was influenced by Rousseau77 and Dewey. In 1924 the
Turkish Ministry of Education invited Dewey to Turkey to report on issues facing the
Turkish educational system. The report was very influential.78 Dewey advocated
‘doing and experiencing’ as a learning method and brought to attention the idea of
constructivism. Mustafa Kemal was also influenced by other Western educational
philosophies and intellectuals, such as Rousseau and Durkheim.79 ‘It can be said that
the recommendations made by Dewey are historically significant in the development
of an educational system.’80 Dewey’s philosophy of education continues to influence
Turkish education policy and practice.81
The Kemalist idea of history had been mostly shaped by French historians and
philosophers. An Italian historian, Leone Caetani, had also influenced Mustafa
Kemal’s ideas on history. Abdullah Cevdet had offered82 to Mustafa Kemal that he
would translate Leone Caetani’s book ‘Annali dell’ Islam’ into Turkish. This book was
expected to be beneficial for people and was translated into Turkish by Hüseyin Cahid
in 1924–1926. The author of ‘Les Turcs Anciens et Modernes’ Mustafa Celaleddin
Downloaded By: [TÜBTAK EKUAL] At: 22:11 11 November 2009
sc[e]dli
72Ş. Turan, Atatürk’ün Dü şünce Yapısını Etkileyen Olaylar, Dü şünceler, Kitaplar [Events,
Ideas and Books that Shaped Atatürk’s Ideas] (Ankara:TTK Press, 1999), 52.
73Abdullah Cevdet, ‘Fas Hükümet-i I·slâmiye’sinin I·nkırâzı’(‘Decline of Islamic Morocco
·
Government’), Cenevre, I çtihad no. 5 (April 1905): 70; Mehmed Âkif, ‘Mev’ıza’(‘Subjects’),
·
Sebilü’r-Re şad, Istanbul 9, no. 230 (6 February 1913): 375; Atatürk’ün Söylev ve Demeçleri
[Atatürk’s Speeches and Declarations] (Ankara: TTK Press, 1952), Vol. 2, 450, Changes in
ideas can be compared in these pages.
74H. Umunç, ‘The Universal Values of Atatürk’s Educational Policy’, Atatürk Ara ştırma
Merkezi Dergisi [Journal of Atatürk Research Center], Ankara 8, no. 22 (November 1991):
33–37.
75These effects can be seen in his book (Medenî Bilgiler) which he wrote for middle schools.
·
See: Inan, Afet. Medenî Bilgiler ve Atatürk’ün El Yazıları [Civil Knowledge and Atatürk’s
Manuscripts] (Ankara: TTK Press, 1969), 51.
76S. Turan, 2000, 15 and 19.
77 I·. H. Baltacıoğlu, Atatürk [Ataturk] (Erzurum: Atatürk Üniversity Press, 1973), 12.
78S. Turan, 2000, 547; C. Cahen, Introduction, in John Dewey: The Middle Work, 1899–1924,
Vol. 15, 1923–1924, ed. J.A. Boydston (Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press,
1983), xx.
79Mustafa Kemal’s social ideas were similar to Durkheim’s sociological theories. He even
translated a few of his books. Compare Mustafa Kemal’s social ideas with Education Morale
and De la Division du Travail Social.
80S. Turan, 2000, 554.
81S. Büyükdüvenci, ‘John Dewey’s Impact on Turkish Education’, in The New Scholarship
on Dewey, ed. J. Garrison Dordrecht (Dordrecht: Kluwer, 1995), 230.
82Abdullah Cevdet, ‘Tercüme Tercüme’[‘Translation Translation’], I· çtihad, I·stanbul no. 156
(1 August 1329/1923): 3211; again see: Berkes, 1969, 441.
S[]celdi
[sc]edli
[sc]edli
][Idot
][Idot
[d]Iot
[sc]edli
[Id]ot
[sc]edli
[Id]ot
[Id]ot
geb[vre]
[]dIot
[Id]ot
History of Education
205
Paşa (1826–1876), Leon Cohen and Deguigne were other historians who influenced
Mustafa Kemal, who was particularly inspired by Deguigne’s idea regarding Turkish
history: that it could be taken up in an integral approach.83 Among other contributors
to Mustafa Kemal’s thought were Herbert George Wells in world history; Rousseau,
Eugene Pittard and Joseph Arthur de Gobineau in civilisation and race; and the
Frenchmen Raymond Poincaré and Jean Paul Gaultier in contemporary ideas.
sc[e]dli
Some educators and their areas of influence during the early Republic period
The Republic’s educational policy philosophy had been developed with the assistance
of intellectuals such as Ziya Gökalp, Avni Başman, Mustafa Şefik, Mehmed Emin
·
Erişirgil, Ismayıl Hakkı Baltacıoğlu and Hilmi Ziya Ülken. It was Mustafa Şefik who
took the first step towards pragmatism in Turkey by translating William James’s
Discussion in Education (Terbiye Muhasebeleri). However, the true representatives of
the pragmatist approach in Turkey were Emin Erişirgil and Avni Başman. They were
initially influenced by John Dewey, who ‘as a philosopher of education is still continuing to influence Turkish education theoretically through his ideas on education and
especially pragmatism’.84 In the journal Hayat, which was first published in 1926, the
implementation of pragmatism in Turkish education was advocated. ‘Erişirgil with his
article “Nietzsche and Knowledge theory” aimed to promote pragmatism’.85 To be
able to implement his ideas, Erişirgil helped to prepare the 1928 Elementary Education
Curriculum according to these directions.
Intellectuals who grappled with educational problems during the early Second
Constitutional Period put these essential problems to one side and looked for complete
abstract education.86 Essential changes were needed in the educational system so as
to raise intellectuals. The most basic of these changes was to offer more observation
and experiential learning opportunities to students. The ideas, inspired by Erişirgil,
laid the foundations for the educational philosophy of Turkey.
Avni Başman also helped to infuse pragmatic ideas into the Turkish education
system. During this process he arranged for the translation of John Dewey’s School
and Child, Child and Society and Education and Democracy and works from Bursy,
Aldous Huxley and Jules Romain. Under the influence of pragmatism, he wrote
Knowledge of Nature for junior high schools. One of the other intellectuals who
contributed to pragmatism in the Turkish educational system was Ziya Ülken who was
affected by Nietzsche’s Moral Philosophy87 in pragmatism and by Henri Lichtenberger and Richard Wagner in other areas such as educational philosophy, sociology,
patriotism and Anatolianism.88
Hakkı Baltacıoğlu was another intellectual who made notable contributions to the
Turkish educational system. ‘He took the first step in incorporating handwork, art,
theatre, acts of speech and educational trips into education’.89 He played a particularly
sc[e]dli
sc[e]dli
dI[]ot
S[]celdi
geb[vre]
S[]celdi
Downloaded By: [TÜBTAK EKUAL] At: 22:11 11 November 2009
sc[e]dli
sc[e]dli
sc[e]dli
sc[e]dli
sc[e]dli
sc[e]dli
geb[vre]
83S. Turan, 2000, 29.
84Büyükdüvenci, 1995.
85S. Turan, 2000, 37, 43, 47.
86M.E. Erişirgil, ‘Kuvvetli Münevver
Zümre Nasıl Yetişir?’ [How to Raise an Effective
·
Intellectual Class?], Istanbul, Hayat no. 6 (6 January 1927): 105.
87H.Z. Ülken, ‘Nietzsche Ahlakı’ [‘Morale of Nietzsche’)], Cogito, I·stanbul no. 25 (2001): 286.
88H.Z. Ülken, Türkiye’de Ça ğ da ş Dü şünce Tarihi [History of Modern Thought in Turkey]
·
( Istanbul: Ülken Press, 2001), 477.
89Ibid., 450.
sc[]edli
sc[]edli
[Id]ot
[Id]ot
g[bevr]
[Id]ot
[sc]edli
[sc]edli
206
M. Gündüz
important role in the acceptance of concepts from the French education system. He
greatly influenced the official history of education, modern teaching and learning,
Turkish plastic arts, religion and modernisation and secularisation of religion in the
Turkish educational system. His ideas on education and sociology were mostly related
to Durkheim, Le Bonn and Rousseau. He was inspired by Rousseau’s Émile ou de
L’éducation90 and issues to do with child development and education. In sociology,
Baltacıoğlu always expressed his appreciation of Durkheim’s Rules of Methodology
of Sociology.91 In some of his articles and books, he was inspired by Bergson92 and
tried to synthesise Bergson and Durkheim’s philosophies. Most Turkish pragmatists
were affected by Walter James and Dewey. James’s Le Pragmatisme de la Philosophie de l’Expérience was one of the most popular books translated by Emin Erişirgil.
While Şekip Tunç advocated pragmatism, he then shifted to Bergsonism.93
Mustafa Rahmi (Balaban [1888–1953])94 was also one of the architects of the new
Turkish educational policy. His interest in the French education system started when
he attended the Jean Jacques Rousseau Institute between 1913 and 1920. Here, he was
tutored by Pierre Bovet, Eduard Claparéde and Adolphe Ferriere. Greatly influenced
by these tutors, Rahmi Bey invited them to Turkey for conferences and other educational activities upon his return. Pierre Bovet and Adolphe Ferriere gave many conferences and prepared a number of education reports in Turkey between 1928 and 1930.
Some of their literature was translated into Turkish by Rahmi Bey. For him, the
ultimate goal of education was similar to that of Durkheim: ‘preparing the individual
for the society’.95 On the other hand, Mustafa Rahmi, who was also familiar with the
German education system, ‘offered this as a model to Turkish education’.96 Another
·
educationist who was educated at the Jean Jacques Rousseau Institute was Ibrahim
Alaaddin Gövsa (1889–1949). Alaaddin graduated from the institute in 1912 and
taught pedagogy and worked as an educational administrator upon his return. During
his career, he translated the work of German and French educators for use as textbooks
in schools.
Another influential educationalist, Raşit Öymen (1998–1949), was interested in
German pedagogy during the early Republic. He studied pedagogy in Germany and
made observations of education methods in European schools. He advocated the
‘German vocational education’ principle and campaigned for its implementation in
Turkey. He also proposed the German patriotism system;97 however, French and
English patriotism and civic educational models became dominant in Turkey.
geb[vre]
sc[e]dli
Downloaded By: [TÜBTAK EKUAL] At: 22:11 11 November 2009
S[]celdi
]dI[ot
sc[e]dli
90I·.H. Baltacıoğlu, I· çtimai Mekteb Nazariyesi ve Prensipleri [The Theory of Social School
·
and Principles] (Istanbul: Suhulet Press, 1933), 53–55; For Rousseau’s ideas, see: J.J.
Rousseau, Émile ou de L’éducation.
91Ülken, Türkiye’de Ça ğ da ş Dü şünce Tarihi, 452.
92 I·rem, 2004, 81.
93Later Mümtaz Turhan and Nurettin Topcu followed Mustafa Sekip Tunç. These two were
the leaders of nationalist and conservatives groups in arranging the educational system around
Bergson’s philosophy which became effective after the 1970s.
94See: For his life and educational works: M. Şahin, Hayatı ve Dü şünceleriyle Mustafa Rahmi
Balaban [Mustafa Rahmi Balaban’s Life and Thoughts] (Ankara: Phonix Press, 2005).
95(M). Rahmi, Gazi Pa şa Hazretlerinin Maarif Umdesi ve Asri Terbiye [Education Principles
of Gazi Pasha and Contemporary Education and Instruction] (Ankara: MEB Press, 1923), 5.
96M. Rahmi, ‘Yeni Terbiye Usûlleri’, Türk Yurdu, I·stanbul 4, no. 104 (25 February 1331/
1915): 348.
97G. Kerschensteiner, Vatanda şlık Terbiyesi [Citizenship Education], trans. H. Raşid ( I·stanbul:
Kanaat Library, 1931).
[Id]ot
geb[vre]
][dIot
][Idot
g[bevr]
[sc]edli
[sc]edli
[Id]ot
S[]celdi
[sc]edli
[sc]edli
[Id]ot
[sc]edli
sc[]edli
[Id]ot
History of Education
207
Ihsan Sungu (1883–1946) was another of the leaders of the Republic’s education
policy and philosophy. He was an educational administrator and as undersecretary to
the minister helped to design the primary school curriculum of 1926. Influenced by
Rousseau and Dewey, this curriculum emphasised ‘unit instruction’ and the ‘project
approach’.98 Sungu worked actively in incorporating these methods into the curriculum and defended the idea that the education system should strive to raise individuals
who would be beneficial to the country. As can be seen, he was also influenced by
French positivist educationists. Others who shaped the Republic’s education included
Ali Haydar Taner, Hüviyet Bekir Bek, Nevzat Ayasbeyoğlu, Habib Ahmet Aytuna,
·
·
Ziya Dalat, A. Fuat Baymur, Rafet Inan, Yunus Kazım Köni and Ibrahim Yasa.
However, their efforts were mainly concerned with how to successfully implement
ideas obtained from the West.
Most of the Second Constitutional Period’s intellectuals were indirectly affected
by Western education and ideas. This sometimes caused them to plagiarise.99 Until
this period, Westernisation meant adherence to French culture and civilisation. Most
students who had been sent abroad for their studies chose France as their destination
and most translations were made from the works of French intellectuals. In the Royal
Medical and Military Academies and the Royal School of Administration, the
language of instruction was French. This French influence lasted until the early years
of the Republic. From this perspective, the Third Republic in France and the post-1920
Turkish Republic have many similarities. Education was made compulsory for all and
it was secularised in France when Jules Ferry was the minister of education. Throughout this period, ‘the main aim of teaching history, geography and civic education at
schools was to preach patriotism due to the traumatic effects of the 1871 Prussian
disaster on the “national pride”’.100 A similar attempt at ‘pedagogical engineering’
was seen in the strategic importance given by the school curriculums of the early
Turkish Republic to the courses on ‘Turkish History’, ‘Turkish Geography’, and
‘National Studies’ (Later National Studies)’.101 It was due to this similarity that the
foreign education experts invited to Turkey during the early Republic had to be an
‘organiser such as Jules Ferry’ rather than a philosopher or sociologist such as John
Dewey’.102 It was claimed that an ‘educational philosophy influenced by Jules Ferry’s
positivist approach would cause a reaction in Turkey’.103
One of the important features of the intellectuals of Russian origin who affected
the Republic’s nationalism and cultural issues was their familiarity with French
geb[vre]
Downloaded By: [TÜBTAK EKUAL] At: 22:11 11 November 2009
]dI[ot
]dI[ot
98Sungu, ‘Proje Usulü’, Terbiye [‘Project Method’, Training], I·stanbul no. 3 (March 1927):
195.
99‘The intellectual ideas of the Second Constitutional Period would be considered plagiarism
according to today’s ethics.’ Hanioğlu, M. Şükrü, ‘Blueprints for a Future Society: Late
Ottoman Materialists on Science, Religion and Art’, in Late Ottoman Society, The Intellectual
Legacy, ed. E. Özdalga (London and New York: Routledge Curzon, 2005), 29.
100D. Schnappeer, La France de l’Intégration, trans. F. Üstel ( I·stanbul: Dost Press, 2002),
217.
101F. Üstel, ‘Türkiye Cumhuriyeti’nde Resmî Yurttaş Profilinin Evrimi’, in Modern Türkiye’de
·
Siyasî Dü şünce, Milliyetçilik [Political Thought in Modern Turkey, Nationalism] (Istanbul:
·
Iletişim Press, 2002), Vol. 4, 276.
102I·.Hakkı. ‘Ecnebî Mütehassıslar’, Ak şam, I·stanbul (20 June 1924).
103M. Ş. Hanioğlu, ‘Kavramlar Yorumlanmamalı, Tartışılmamalı mı? (II)’, Zaman, I·stanbul
(19 May 2007). (To date, no study has been conducted on the impact of Jules Ferry’s
positivism on Turkish education and thought. No reference has been made to Ferry in either
the texts of late Ottoman intellectuals or in the works of modern Turkish thought researchers).
[Id]ot
geb[vre]
S[]celdi
[Id]ot
sc[]edli
[sc]edli
]
[Id]ot
[Idot
sc[]edli
d]I[ot
[sc]edli
S[]celdi
geb[vre]
]dI[ot
sc[]edli
]dI[ot
208
M. Gündüz
culture. For instance, Yusuf Akçura and Ahmed Ağaoğlu had graduated from the
Ecole Libre des Sciences Politiques. The positivists Emile Boumthy and Alber Sorel
were among their teachers. Abdullah Cevdet was affected by Boumthy and translated
some of his articles and books.104 However, the French intellectuals Boumthy, Comte,
Durkheim and Saint Simon had positivist ideas different from each other and, perhaps
more importantly, Ottoman intellectuals were almost blind to these differences. This
indicates that their understanding of Western intellectuals was limited. Ottoman intellectuals shared ubiquitously with these different ideas, ‘anti-clericalism, scientism,
biological materialism, authoritarianism and intellectual elitism’.105
Downloaded By: [TÜBTAK EKUAL] At: 22:11 11 November 2009
geb[vre]
geb[vre]
Origins of the ideas advocated by Second Constitutional Period intellectuals
The origins of the ideas advocated by Second Constitutional Period intellectuals fall
into two groups: the oriental and local precursor; and the Western precursor. The oriental and local precursor can further be divided into two parts as the Turkic world and
the Islamic word. Late Ottoman intellectuals were affected by the following intellectuals of Turkish origin: Şinasi, Namık Kemal, Ali Suavi, Ahmed Mithat, Veled Çelebi,
Mustafa Celalettin Paşa, Necip Asım, Bursalı Tahir, Muallim Naci, Münif Pasa,
Mizancı Murad, Tevfik Fikret and the following intellectuals of Russian origin:
·
Şehabettin Mercani, Kayyum el-Nasiri, Alimcan Barudi, Ismail Gaspıralı, Hüseyinzâde
Ali and Akyiğitzâde Musa.106 Late Ottoman intellectuals always emphasised that they
had been affected by their works and ideas. Second Constitutional Period intellectuals
were also influenced by Egyptian and Middle Eastern contemporary intellectuals: Musa
·
Carullah, Reşit Rıza, Muhammed Abduh, Muhammed Ikbal and Cemaleddin
Efgani.107 They used these intellectuals’ ideas in their works and also translated their
·
·
ideas. Mehmed Âkif, Izmirli Ismail Hakkı, E. Muhammed Hamdi, Eşref Edib, Aksekili
Ahmed Hamdi and Şemseddin Günaltay were particularly interested in contemporary
intellectuals whose origins lay in the Middle East. However, during the early Republic,
these Second Constitutional Period Islamic intellectuals’ ideas were hindered and their
intellectual effects were later regarded in a narrow frame.108
The pro-Western intellectual Abdullah Cevdet cited in his works from el-Maarri,
Mevlâna, Ömer Hayyam, Gazali, Farabi, Ibn-i Sina and Yunus Emre. By doing so, he
tried to make original syntheses between oriental and Western cultures and civilisations.
Gökalp, who had effects on the Second Constitutional Period’s intellectuals and the
S[]celdi
sc[e]dli
S[]celdi
dI[]ot
geb[vre]
sc[e]dli
]dI[ot
dI[]ot
dI[]ot
sc[e]dli
S[]celdi
104Zürcher, 2005, 24.
105Zürcher, 2005, 25.
106F. Georgeon, Türk Milliyetçili ğ inin Kökenleri, Yusuf Akçura
(1876–1935) [Aux Origines du
·
Nationalisme Turc Yusuf Akçura (1876–1935)] (Istanbul: Tarih Vakfı Yurt Press, 1999), 23.
107A. Alperen, Sosyolojik Açıdan Türkiye’de I· slâm ve Modernle şme [Islam and
Modernisation in Turkey from a Sociological Perspective] (Adana: Karahan Press, 2003).
108After the 1960s, the influence of modern Middle Eastern Islamic intellectuals became
widespread in Turkey. This led to the development of a new Islamic interpretation in the
country, which was different from the traditional Islamic belief. This movement started with
·
the translation of the works of Muhammed Abduh, Ikbal, Reşid Rıza and particularly Seyyid
Kutub, Mevdudi and Hamidullah into Turkish. This new intellectual movement showed itself
·
in the political arena after the 1990s. See for this subject: I. Kara, ‘Dini Düşünce Tarihimiz
·
Açısından Hamidullah’ın Eserlerinin Türkçeye/Türkiye’ye Intikali ve Tesirleri’ [‘The
Translation of Hamidullah’s Works into Turkish/Turkey and its Impact from the Perspective
of History of Religious Thought’] Kutadgubilig, Felsefe-Bilim Ara ştırmaları Dergisi,
·
[Journal of Philosophy-Science Research] Istanbul no. 9 (March 2006): 235–272.
g[bevr]
]dI[ot
] [dIot
[sc]edli
[Id]ot
sc[]edli
[Id]ot
sc[]edli
][Idot
[sc]edli
[Id]ot
Downloaded By: [TÜBTAK EKUAL] At: 22:11 11 November 2009
History of Education
209
Republic’s intellectual life, was mostly influenced by the European intellectual
Durkheim. He translated from Durkheim especially in the fields of society and education. There are great similarities between Durkheim and Gökalp’s definitions of education.109 According to Gökalp, ‘the individual exists for his society, an idea which was
related to Durkheim’s societal ideas. Gökalp was the representative of the France
Sociology School which was founded by Durkheim and had Halbwacsh, Levy Bruhl,
Hubert, Marcel Mausse and Granet as members’.110 In one sense, Ziya Gökalp was
the founder of modern Turkish sociology. He brought basic terms to Turkish sociology
and tried to create an educational philosophy loyal to the French Sociology School.
Meanwhile, he was also influenced by Alfred Fouillée and Gabriel Tarde. After 1918,
though, Tarde’s influence diminished. Especially after these years, he emphasised in
his works ‘individualism and personality’.111 Durkheim and Renouvier influenced him
in these concepts. Ziya Gökalp’s ideas known as ‘stratification’ and ‘social division
of labour’ had been based on Durkheim’s De la Division du Travail Social. Besides
these figures, he was influenced by Ahmed Rıza, Prince Sabahattin and Mizancı Murat
in the areas of ethnicity, nationality and culture.112
Ahmed Rıza received agriculture education in France. However, the more important point is that he met Emile Durkheim’s student Pierre Laffitte and followed his
courses. Ahmed Rıza was an outstanding follower of August Comte’s positivism in
Turkey.113 He was so loyal to positivism that he used the Positivist calendar in a journal
which he started (Me şveret) and in some of his other works. He accepted Comte’s ideas
as faith and some of his political ideas came from ‘Comte philosophy which relies on
Saint Simon’s ideas’.114 In social issues, an enlightenment intellectual, D’Holbach,
affected Ahmed Rıza. ‘Darwin and Herbert Spencer can be seen in the origin of Ahmed
Rıza’s oppositional ideas of revolution.’115
French thinkers had a major influence on Prince Sabahattin who was one of the
most important thinkers and political intellectuals of the Second Constitutional Period.
The origins of his sociological ideas relied on Edmond Demolins. His idea of the
changing structure of Turkish society relied mostly on Western thinkers and his
sympathy for Anglo-Saxon success. Prince Sabahattin resorted to the sociological
ideas of Le Play and Edmond Demolins to answer the question ‘How can Turkey be
rescued?’.116 He benefited from Science Sociale which was founded by Le Play in
1903. Most of the articles published in this journal belonged to Henri de Tourville and
Demolins. Prince Sabahattin and his colleagues also translated several works of Paule
Descamps and Demolins.
Abdullah Cevdet was born in Arapgir and he graduated from Istanbul Royal Medical Academy. During his education there, he encountered and accepted materialist
[sc]edli
Figure 3. Z. Gökalp, who designated Turkish educational philosophy, embraced the ideas of Emile Durkheim. He was among the intellectuals by whom Mustafa Kemal was highly affected.
·
Gökalp, ‘Insan Terakkisi’, Küçük Mecmua [‘Progressive of Humanity’, Small
Journal], Diyarbakır no. 13 (1922): 2.
110N. Öner, Fransız Sosyoloji Okuluna Göre Mantı ğ ın Men şei Problemi [According to France
·
Social School Problem of Origins of Logic] (Ankara: A.Ü. Ilahiyat Fak. Press, 1965), 5.
111Ziya Gökalp, ‘Ferdiyet ve Şahsiyet’, Yeni Mecmua [Individualism and Personality’, New
·
Journal], Istanbul no. 12 (1917): 2–3.
112Berkes, 1969, 393.
113Korlaelçi, 2002,199.
114Ş. Mardin, Jön Türklerin Siyasi Fikirleri [Political Ideas of Young Turks] ( I·stanbul: I·letişim
Press, 2001), 180.
115Mardin, 2001, 187.
116P. Sabahaddin. Türkiye Nasıl Kurtulabilir? Meslek-i I· çtimâî ve Programı [How can
·
Turkey be Rescued?] ( Istanbul: Kader Press, 1334/1918), 1–20.
109Ziya
][Idot
g[bevr]
[sc]edli
[Id]ot
S[]celdi
[Id]ot
S[]celdi
[Id]ot
][dIot
[Id]ot
[Id]ot
sc[]edli
Downloaded By: [TÜBTAK EKUAL] At: 22:11 11 November 2009
210
M. Gündüz
Figure 3. Z. Gökalp, who designated Turkish educational philosophy, embraced the ideas of
Emile Durkheim. He was among the intellectuals by whom Mustafa Kemal was highly affected.
ideas. He was one of the founders of the CUP. However, his importance was mainly
due to his intellectuality. Among Ottoman intellectuals, Cevdet was the second most
important proponent of rational and secular thought after Şinasi. He understood the
European lifestyle and ideas and had close relationships with European intellectuals.
·
In his 358-volume I ctihat Journal (1904–1932), the reforms of the Republic were first
mentioned and discussed. During his student years, he was a very devout person. He
wrote a eulogy (Nât-i Serif) to the prophet Mohammed. However, close to his graduation, he became influenced by European philosophers and theologians and changed
his ideas. ‘Even though he accepted Luis Büchner’s scientism, he advocated till the
end of his life the notion that society cannot live without religion.’ Parallelism can be
seen between this idea and Büchner’s ersatzreligion concepts.117 Cevdet was mostly
influenced by European thinkers and philosophers such as Gustave Le Bonn,118 Jean
S[]celdi
[dI]ot
·
·
Cevdet, ‘Tarihten Bir Sahife-i Hûnîn: ‘Saint Barthelemy’’, I çtihad, Istanbul no.
147 (15 April 1922), and Hanioğlu, 2005, 40,43; Hanioğlu, M. Şükrü, ‘Dindar Bir Dinsiz Ya
da Dinsiz Bir Dindar: Doktor Abdullah Cevdet ve Modern Türk Toplumu (1, 2)’, Zaman,’
·
Istanbul (15 September 2005).
118Abdullah Cevdet, ‘Doktor Gustave Le Bonn’, I· çtihad, I·stanbul no. 5 (July 1905): 118.
117Abdullah
][dIot
geb[vre]
geb[vre]
]dI[ot
S[]celdi
[Idot
]
[d]Iot
[Id]ot
Downloaded By: [TÜBTAK EKUAL] At: 22:11 11 November 2009
History of Education
211
Figure 4. Abdullah Cevdet, who was influenced by French Positivism and German Materialism, affected Mustafa Kemal with his social and philosophical ideas. He advocated laic and
democratic education after the 1910s.
Marie Guyau, Luis Büchner, Emile Boutmy and Félix Isnard. He regarded many of
them as leaders of their times and translated some of their works into Turkish. He
prepared philosophical volumes compiled from Epikur, Renan, Hafiz, Şirazi, Isnard
and Büchner.119 He was also affected by Rousseau’s Social Contract. When we look
at Cevdet’s ideas about education, women, the economy, the importance of religion in
society, freedom of thought, covering the head (tesettür) and Westernisation, it can be
seen that he was attempting to combine French positivism, German materialism, local
values and Islam.
Abdullah Cevdet is also famous for the conflict between religion and secular ideas.
While he was translating the works of D’Holbach and Voltaire, he also taught about
‘Gazali’de Marifetullah’. Islamic Muslim mysticism was another source of inspiration
for him. He did not support atheism; he looked for a religion which was fused with
secular life. He ‘used the ideas of both el-Maarri and Mevlâna to Islamicise specific
modern theories such as those of Cesare Lombrosso’.120 According to him ‘Büchner’s
materialist ideas and Islamic rules can be fused’.121 Abdullah Cevdet was also
S[]celdi
Figure 4. Abdullah Cevdet, who was influenced by French Positivism and German Materialism, affected Mustafa Kemal with his social and philosophical ideas. He advocated laic and democratic education after the 1910s.
119The first example of this was offered by Münif Paşa in the 1860s. He compiled texts from
ancient Greek philosophers in his book Muhaverât-ı Hikemiye [Felsefî Konu şmalar:
Philosophical Speeches].
120Hanioğlu, 2005, 54.
121Ibid., 39.
sc[]edli
[sc]edli
geb[vre]
212
M. Gündüz
inspired by Jean Marie Guyau’s Esquisse d’une Morale sans Obligation, Ni Sanction
and L’irreligion de L’avenir in religion and secularist ideas. ‘Here, it can be said that
he was a loyal follower of Marie Guyau’.122 Like Beşir Fuad, Cevdet also emphasised
the need for a social class of elite that would motivate social change. He was inspired
by John Stuart Mill. ‘Like most Ottoman materialists, he also liked German ethic
materialists such as Überwag and Straus’.123 These realities need to be included in any
investigation of the legacy of the late Ottoman intellectuals.
Whether they had personal difficulties or not in understanding the ideas that they
encountered or displeasure towards the lifestyle that they left, some of the Ottoman
intellectuals were engaged in an effort to form a bridge between Islam and materialism, even though materialism seemed to contradict religion. For this reason, the
Second Constitutional Period witnessed an attempt to develop a new version of materialism fused with Islam. When faced with Western civilisation, Ottoman intellectuals
underwent unexpected changes. The ‘start of vulgar-materialist adaptation of circulation among Ottoman intellectuals in the mid-nineteenth century was the most striking
one’.124 Although German materialism only partially influenced Ottoman intellectuals, this small impact nevertheless helped shape Republican society. However, ‘the
Second constitutional period intellectuals could see that Büchner, Haeckel, Moleschot
and Vogt scientism could not advance society or provide a moral ground. Beşir Fuad
found a solution in positivism, Baha Tevfik embraced monism and Abdullah Cevdet
tried to combine Islam with scientism and Guyau’s moralism’.125 Until the Second
constitutional period, most Ottoman intellectuals read European materialists and were
affected by them. However, most of their own work is evidence that in fact they had
an incomplete understanding of materialist philosophy.
Mustafa Satı Bey (San’a 1888: Cairo 1959) was one of the most important educators who contributed to the construction of the modern Turkish educational system.126
He advocated arrangements which started from elementary education. Satı Bey was
the first Ottoman intellectual to emphasise the importance of individual education, and
to attempt to introduce contemporary standards to elementary education. He contributed to the promotion of patriotism and civic education. Satı Bey was influenced by
European intellectuals’ works, such as Bonisse’s physiology, Letourneau’s sociology
and ethnology, Edmond Perrier’s philosophy and zoology, Albert Goudet’s philosophy and ethnology.127 ‘Deniker, Verneau, Quatrefages, Topinard, Mortillet and
Louise Finger’128 were the main sources of his sociological and educational thought.
Satı Bey expressed the importance of education for society by saying: ‘every nation’s
culture is the goal of that nation’s education. If a Turkish child is going to live in
Turkish society, he has to be educated according to Turkish culture’.129 Similarly,
Durkheim emphasised the importance of education for society in one of his speeches:
Downloaded By: [TÜBTAK EKUAL] At: 22:11 11 November 2009
sc[e]dli
sc[e]dli
122Hanioğlu,
123Hanioğlu,
124Ibid., 28.
125Hanioğlu,
126Satı Bey
geb[vre]
geb[vre]
‘Dindar Bir Dinsiz Ya da Dinsiz Bir Dindar’, Zaman (16 September 2005).
2005, 43.
‘Dindar Bir Dinsiz Ya da Dinsiz Bir Dindar’, Zaman (15, 16 September 2005).
produced many important books and educational documents. But his
philosophical contributions to the Turkish educational system have not been researched yet. It
is believed that this is because of his nationalist tendency after the First World War.
127Ülken, Türkiye’de Ça ğ da ş Dü şünce Tarihi, 2001, 179.
128Ibid., 181.
129Satı el-Husri, Vatan I· çin, Be ş Konferans [Five Conferences For the Country] (I·stanbul:
Konferans Press, 1329/1913), 128.
geb[vre]
g[bevr]
][dIot
[sc]edli
[sc]edli
[sc]edli
[Id]ot
History of Education
213
‘every nation forms its educational system according to its societal and cultural
conditions and the educational system fulfils needs of the society’.130 These two very
similar ideas show that Satı Bey was influenced by Durkheim. The moral education
that Satı Bey mentioned in Education Method (Fenn-i Terbiye) reflects Durkheim’s
recommendations for moral education.
Nüzhet Sabit was another important intellectual in the Second Constitutional
Period. He also was an admirer of Durkheim – so much so that he even accused
Gökalp of not being a good follower of Durkheim. On the other hand, Montesquieu
and Le Bonn had effects on the works of the well-known Westerniser Celal Nuri.
Montesquieu and Le Bonn’s influences can be seen in Celal Nuri’s publications entitled History of the Future (Tarih-i Istikbâl) and The Laws We Need (Havâic-i
Kanuniyemiz). His ideas about the law had been shaped by Montesquieu. Beşir Fuad,
who was the first positivist Ottoman intellectual, ‘brought scientific ideas to literature
and poetry with the inspiration he got from Büchner’.131 By adding populism to
science, he made science well liked and wrote popular articles. However, his works
and ideas were different than French popular scientism. ‘He stated that he could not
think of literature without science and he became the one who brought realism to
literature’.132 Subhi Edhem, in his article ‘Lamarck and Lamarckisme’,133 mentioned
the importance of Lamarckism and Lamarck’s influence on himself.134 Mizancı
Murad, who was well respected by the Second Constitutional Period intellectuals,
was influenced by Montesquieu’s ‘Esprit Des Lois and Rousseau’s Social
Contract’.135 One of the other important political writers, Ali Kemal, admired
Danton, Condorcet, Saint Just and Robespierre.136 He was influenced by French
literature and culture and reflected this in his works.
The broad explanations given in the text and Ottoman intellectuals’ adventure of
being influenced by the European intellectuals are summarised in Table 1. Ideological
sources of the late Ottoman intellectuals – which paved the way for the educational
reforms of the Republic period – are presented in two grades. Much of the opuses of
the European intellectuals presented at the first column (First-degree influences) are
translated into Turkish. The European intellectuals presented at the second column
(Second- and third-degree influences) are only cited in some books and other writings.
Downloaded By: [TÜBTAK EKUAL] At: 22:11 11 November 2009
sc[e]dli
Conclusion
With this research, new discoveries have been made about the origins of the Turkish
Republic’s educational reforms and the pioneers of these ideas. As mentioned earlier,
the intellectual preparation of the republican reforms had been made during the
130R. Aron, Toplumbilim Dü şüncesinde Ana Akımlar: Pareto, Weber, Durkheim [Basic
Movements in Sociological Ideas: Pareto, Weber, Durkheim] (Ankara: Kültür Bak. Press,
1973), 218.
131Hanioğlu, 2005, 37.
132Korlaelçi, 2002, 186.
133Subhi Edhem. ‘Lamarck ve Lamarkism’, Felsefe Mecmuası [Magazine of Philosophy],
·
Istanbul 1, no. 6 (1914): 81–83.
134M. Akgün, Materyalizmin Türkiye’ye Giri şi ve I· lk Etkileri [The Introduction of
Materialism to Turkey and its First Effects] (Ankara: Kültür Bak. Press, 1988), 286; N. Toku,
·
Türkiye’de Anti-Materyalist Felsefe (Spiritüalizm)-I lk Temsilciler [Anti-Materialist
·
Philosophy in Turkey, First Representatives] ( Istanbul: Beyan Press, 1996).
135Berkes, 1969, 395
136O. Özsoy, Gazetecinin I· nfazı [The Execution of the Journalist] ( I·stanbul: Timaş Press, 1997).
[sc]edli
geb[vre]
[Idot
]
[sc]edli
][dIot
] [dIot
[Id]ot
[dI]ot
[Ido]t
sc[]edli
214
M. Gündüz
Table 1.
Late Ottoman intellectuals who were influenced by Europe.
Late Ottoman intellectuals
First-degree influences
Abdullah Cevdet
Luis Büchner, Marie Guyau,
Gustave Le Bonn
Parvus, Ernest Renan
Luis Büchner
August Comte, Emile Litré, E.
Renan, Herbert Spencer
Ahmed Agayef
Ahmed Nebil
Ahmesd şuayb
sc[]edli
Ahmed Rıza
Ali Kemal
Baha Tevfik
Beşir Fuad
A. Comte, Pierre Laffitte
Danton, Robespierre
Büchner, Hackel
A. Comte, Emile Litré,
Voltaire, Victor Hugo
Celal Nuri
Edhem Nejded
H. Cahit Yalçın
Montesquieu, Rousseau
Lamarck, Darwin
H. Taine, J. S. Mill, E. Zola
Mustafa Satı
Spencer, Létourneau, Albert
Goudret
Mehmed Şemseddin
Nüzhet Sabit
Prens Sabahaddin
Rıza Tevfik
Salih Zeki
Subhi Edhem
Emile Durkheim
Emile Durkheim
Le Play, E. Demolines
Herbert Spencer
August Comte
Luis Büchner
Yusuf Akçura
Albert Sorel, Parvus, Leon
Cahun, Arminius Vambery
Ziya Gökalp
August Comte, Emile
Durkheim
Mustafa Rahmi
Pierre Bovet, Eduard
Claparéde, Adolphe Ferriere
Georg Kerschensteiner
J.J. Rousseau, John Dewey,
A. Binot- Simon
Downloaded By: [TÜBTAK EKUAL] At: 22:11 11 November 2009
sc[]edli
S[]celdi
H. Fikret Kanat
·
Ihsan Sungu
·
I. Alaaddin Gövsa
[Id]ot
[Id]ot
Second- and third-degree
influences
Cabanis, Karl Wogt, Ernest
Haeckel, Moleschot, Peacok
James Dermesteter, E. Boumty
Earnest Haeckel
Gabriel Monod, Ernest
Lavisse, G. Flaubert, Karsten
Niebuhr, Ranke, Mommsen,
H. Taine
M. Hector Denis
Condorcet, Saint Just
Lamarck, Dubois
Henry Lewes, Claud Bernard,
Diderot, D’Lambert, Emile
Zola, H. Spencer
Emile Durkheim, Büchner
Ernest Renan, A. Dumas, Paul
Bourget
Deniker, Verneau,
Quatrefages, Topinard,
Mortillet, Luis Figner,
Edmond Perrier
Herbert Spencer
Henry de Tourville
J. Stuart Mill
Henri Poincaré, J. S. Mill
Lamarck, Darwin, August
Comte
De Guignes, Lumley Davids,
Jules Halévy, Théophile
Brentano, Anatole Leroy, E.
Boumty
A. Fouillé, Gustave Le Bonn,
Gabriel Tarde, Bergson,
Boutroux, Renouvier
Emile Durkheim, J.J.
Rousseau, Pestalozzi
J.J. Rousseau
Thorndike, Kilpart
Tanzimat and the Second Constitutional Period. The origins of the reforms and the
early efforts to implement them go back at least a hundred years from the foundation
of the Turkish Republic. In this process, key roles were given to education to solve
social problems. However, to be able to accomplish its role, education had to be filled
Downloaded By: [TÜBTAK EKUAL] At: 22:11 11 November 2009
History of Education
215
and shaped with new content. This comprised the values brought by mid-nineteenthcentury Western positivism and materialist science.
Much as it is not certain whether seventeenth-century Ottoman society had
general secularist tendencies, the secularist ideas of the sixteenth-century Ottoman
bureaucracy are obvious. ‘One theme developed here, for instance, is that in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, the discourse of the increasingly powerful Ottoman
bureaucracy already carried aspects of a type of “positivism” long before the midnineteenth century reforms of the Tanzimat.’137 With the Tanzimat, Ottoman intellectuals’ rationalist thought as inspired by European intellectuals paved the way for
Kemalism. It is possible to see the traces of Kemalist thought and the roots of the
education reforms of the Republican period in the ideological transformation of late
Ottoman intellectuals. ‘The main principles of Atatürk originated with the influence
of Western philosophical movements which became well known throughout the
Ottoman Empire, from Istanbul and Izmir to Beirut, at the end of the nineteenth
century despite the Sultan’s ban’.138 Modern Turkey is the summit of an ideological
transformation which started at the end of the seventeenth century.
Late Ottoman intellectuals shaped the Republican era educational policy and the
new society. These intellectuals’ education and background had profound effects on
their outlook. Their ideas and intellectual geography represented genuineness and
complex specialty. Most of these intellectuals had relationships with leading institutions and individuals in the nineteenth century. While the level of these relationships
is not known precisely, neither are the answers to questions such as who was influenced by whom, in what ways and to what extent. This makes it difficult to understand
the origins of the intellectual life in the Republican era. Most of the Ottoman intellectuals attended institutions in Europe. However, the East was not neglected and
attempts were made to combine Western ideas and philosophies with oriental ones.
It was Mustafa Kemal who identified many important dimensions, the reforms of
the new Republic and its educational system. Much research has been conducted to
date concerning the influences on Mustafa Kemal; however, the background of those
who influenced him is less well known. This study has found that Republican educational policy and philosophy theorists included Beşir Fuad, Hüseyinzâde Ali Bey,
Ziya Gökalp, Yusuf Akçura, Ahmed Ağaoğlu, Abdullah Cevdet, Kılıçzâde Hakkı,
·
·
Avni Bsaşman, I. Hakkı Baltacıoğlu, Mustafa Rahmi, Ihsan Sungu and Mehmed Emin
Erişirgil.
The common features of these intellectuals were that they accepted and gave voice
to positivist and materialist philosophies and their proponents. After the 1930s,
pragmatism was also added to these ideas. Late Ottoman intellectuals did not find their
uniqueness within these ideas. This indicated that there was confusion and imitation
of ideas, which prevented them from producing authentic works. This issue was to
show itself frequently as a philosophical problem in the Turkish education system.
Russian-origin intellectuals had different assessment roles among educational and
social philosophy theorists in the Republic. These intellectuals’ life experiences had
been shaped in Russia, France and the Ottoman Empire. Their most obvious feature
was their attempt to import French culture and philosophy. This was natural as both
the intellectuals of Russian origin and those who were born in Ottoman territory were
sc[e]dli
geb[vre]
sc[e]dli
dI[]ot
geb[vre]
geb[vre]
dI[]ot
sc[e]dli
137Mardin, 2005, 146.
138Ş. Mardin, Türkiye’de
·
Iletişim Press, 1990), 160.
S[]celdi
]
sc[]edli
·
Toplum ve Siyaset [Society and Politics in Turkey] (Istanbul:
][Idot
[Idot
216
M. Gündüz
affected by French culture and philosophy. These influences could be seen particularly
in sociological works and in the role given to sociology. In this sense, Comte,
Durkheim, Boumty and other French sociologists and philosophers were the forerunners of Ottoman intellectuals who competed to find a European leader to try to understand, and then to translate their works. However, these efforts, which did not consider
the social realities, either did not find any reaction or were unsuccessful.
The Turkish Westernisation adventure in the last two centuries was not much
different from that of the early nineteenth-century quest for change in general. Late
Ottoman intellectuals’ efforts to understand their contemporaries were undertaken
with sincerity and sensitivity and were advanced for their times.
Downloaded By: [TÜBTAK EKUAL] At: 22:11 11 November 2009
Notes on contributors
Mustafa Gündüz was born in Mersin/Gülnar 1976. He was attended SDU, Faculty of Education
and obtained his higher education degree in 1997. He then pursued a Master’s degree at Ankara
University’s History of Education Program and graduated in 2001 upon the acceptance of his
thesis entitled ‘Eight-Year Uninterrupted Obligatory Education in the Turkish Press after 28
February 1997’. He completed his doctoral studies at Ankara University, Educational Sociology program. His PhD dissertation was entitled ‘Periodicals as an Education and Moderniza·
tion Instrument in the Second Constitutional Period ( I çtihad, Sebilü’r-Re şad and Türk Yurdu
Journals)’ (Turkish: II. Me şrutiyet Dönemi E ğ itim ve Modernle şme Aracı Olarak Süreli
·
Yayınlar: I çtihad, Sebilü’r-Re şad, Türk Yurdu). He continues to study Turkish educational
history and sociology at Firat University in the Faculty of Education.
[]dIot
[sc]edli
][dIot
g[bevr]
[sc]edli
[sc]edli
[sc]edli